Tennessee and Virginia sue NCAA over NIL
It looks like the Tennessee and Virginia Attorneys General (or is it Attorney Generals?) filed a lawsuit alleging antitrust violations against the NCAA. This comes one day after one day after it was announced that the University of Tennessee received a Notice of Allegations from the NCAA for violations of NIL guidelines.
From this source:
The lawsuit filed in the Eastern District of Tennessee claims the NCAA is “enforcing rules that unfairly restrict how athletes can commercially use their name, image and likeness at a critical juncture in the recruiting calendar."
“These anticompetitive restrictions violate the Sherman Act, harm the States and the welfare of their athletes, and should be declared unlawful and enjoined.”
“Student-athletes generate massive revenues for the NCAA, its members, and corporations within the college sports industry, especially in football and basketball,” said Attorney General Miyares. “Student athletes should have more freedom over negotiating and earning money for their skills and ability. Colleges and universities benefit dramatically from the success of their student athletes - it’s only fair that student athletes also get the full picture of how they may benefit from their choice of school as well.”
I'm not a lawyer, but this temporary injunction that UT is seeking looks like it could be significant:
The suit alleges that the NCAA has violated antitrust laws by denying athletes their ability to earn full compensation for their names, images and likenesses. The plaintiffs -- including the attorneys general of Tennessee and Virginia -- may, in a matter of days, seek a temporary injunction that could suspend the NCAA's NIL rules and limitations.
January 31st, 2024 at 11:05 AM ^
one day after one day after
Oof. Does that make it two days after?
January 31st, 2024 at 11:17 AM ^
Ereyesterday, if I am not mistaken.
January 31st, 2024 at 11:06 AM ^
Wait a fucking second. So you're trying to tell me that some schools actually fight back against the NCAA and dont just show their belly and let the best HC they've had in God-knows-how-long get suspended (twice) while doing nothing to publicly support him?
This is exactly what we should've done if we organizationally had a pair of balls and weren't complete wussies when it comes to a fight.
January 31st, 2024 at 11:09 AM ^
It's not the schools, it's the state government. I think the fact that we share a state with MSU got in our way. The AG in Tennessee can do things to benefit UT because there's no real in-state rival. That will be universally popular. Same deal with UVA and VT for this NIL lawsuit - it benefits both schools.
Michigan's government would have faced a split constituency in regard to standing up to the NCAA and B1G about Harbaugh's BS suspensions. MSU was front and center with their "player safety" lies.
January 31st, 2024 at 11:14 AM ^
Not really. This is just pandering against an easy target and wasting taxpayer resources. While these are public entities, universities have their own governing boards and from a quick review, it doesn't look like the governing boards or any impacted student athletes were named as plaintiffs. As such, I think the court will find that the states lack Article III standing to sue. Could be wrong, but that's my initial read.
Edit: looks like there was a recent lawsuit against the NCAA filed by several states over a transfer rule issue and there was a TRO and injunction entered. So, perhaps my standing thoughts/fears are unwarranted. Haven't dug into that case, though.
January 31st, 2024 at 11:21 AM ^
Dumb question from a non-lawyer. If UT or UVA filed amicus briefs explaining how the NCAA rules are harmful (not sure if they would, just theoretically speaking), could that give the states standing? My understanding is that they could do this without being parties to the legal case, right?
January 31st, 2024 at 11:25 AM ^
Nope. Amicus briefs don't change anything about threshold standing questions.
January 31st, 2024 at 11:46 AM ^
It is not only the AGs that are responding. UT’s Chancellor sent a very defiant and critical letter to the NCAA (full letter here) yesterday, presumably with some degree of coordination with the AGs in anticipation of this litigation.
January 31st, 2024 at 12:40 PM ^
And lets be honest given the MSU fan the choice of:
MSU fails/UM fails
or
MSU gets better/UM gets better
They are taking the first one.
January 31st, 2024 at 11:15 AM ^
I mean, I get your point, but I do think Michigan actually thinks having an NCAA is better than the wild west that is happening, and is about to get worse.
Someone needs to hurry up, pay the players, have them unionize, and put actual rules back into place.
January 31st, 2024 at 11:31 AM ^
I think the NCAA is going to have to be forced by a court to allow that. Say we did just start paying our players directly using AD revenues. Imagine the penalties the NCAA would try to hit the school with. They would probably try to SMU us until the courts told them to fuck off.
Michigan doesn't have the stomach for that kind of fight.
January 31st, 2024 at 11:49 AM ^
LMAO!! Michigan just submitted against cheeseburgers from two years earlier, and straight up folded like a cheap-ass broken chair against signs - something that probably isn't even a rule against!
Don't put too much effort into the hope of UM paying players from the AD budget until a few years after the NCAA 'allows' it.
January 31st, 2024 at 11:55 AM ^
Probably going to have to be a school that calls itself a "leader" to take that step.
January 31st, 2024 at 12:07 PM ^
I don't understand how making the players employees and paying them directly will solve the NIL problem.
It was previously established that the schools do not have the right to prevent the athletes from profiting from their NIL. It seems to me that even if the players become union represented employees and have a contract, it is unlikely that the Union would agree to a provision that would eliminate the players' ability to sell their NIL. (Even assuming that the union could agree to giving up their right to sell their NIL).
It seems more likely that even if there is a CBA that establishes wages/salaries for players they will still have a right to their NIL and we'll still have the problem of wealthy school boosters paying large sums to get athletes to play for their favorite schools.
January 31st, 2024 at 12:19 PM ^
There's always going to be under the table payments whether they unionize or not. NIL deals will be endorsement deals. But it will most definitely help the portal by locking them into contracts. Whether it be a 2 year or 4 year or whatever, they will be at X school for this long without having to re-recruit your current roster every year. If the coach leaves, oh well, your hear until your contract is up. Maybe it waters down the money some so you don't get as much under the table payments, maybe it doesn't. But it will put some structure in place. We're headed for NFL lite, whether anyone likes it or not.
January 31st, 2024 at 1:38 PM ^
Title IX would cause every player to be paid equally. The $1m a QB would earn wouldn't be sustainable over thousands of athletes.
January 31st, 2024 at 9:03 PM ^
Not necessarily. They are not doing the same work and they are not prevented from trying out for the football team.
January 31st, 2024 at 3:51 PM ^
Unionized players could get cuts of TV revenue - that’s gonna be a more sustainable deal than constantly hitting up boosters for 6 or 7 figures.
January 31st, 2024 at 12:33 PM ^
Michigan believes in amateurism more than most universities. College football has been semi-pro for some time now though.
January 31st, 2024 at 11:56 AM ^
Perception or reality?
So, let's look at the Harbaugh suspension.
The Big Ten announced their unprecedented suspension of Coach Harbaugh around 3:30 on Friday, November 10, 2023. By 6:00 pm, Michigan had filed an Ex Parte Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order against Tony Petitti and the Big Ten however the court did not sign the TRO and instead scheduled a hearing with both parties for 9:00 AM on November 17, 2023.
How exactly is that not supporting Harbaugh?
January 31st, 2024 at 12:10 PM ^
You left out the first suspension. Harbaugh disputed the NCAA's Level I allegation against him for lying over a burger receipt and Michigan effectively plea bargained, first trying to negotiate a four-game suspension over it and then (after the NCAA backed out) unilaterally giving him a three-game suspension.
On the second, the University did initially challenge the ruling, but then settled the day before the hearing happened.
January 31st, 2024 at 3:47 PM ^
Time, place and circumstances. The court had already essentially denied the Ex Parte motion and Harbaugh had already missed the Penn State game. The attorneys on this board have already given their opinions multiple times and the likelihood of an injunction before the Maryland was not realistic, with many members commenting that with the failure of the Ex Parte motion success at all or even getting a ruling before the Ohio State game was doubtful.
Chris Partridge had just been terminated and the Big Ten was offering to end their involvement. Finally, Stalions had been a member of the Michigan coaching staff. Regardless of the difference between 3rd party filming and scouting, there was pretty damning proof of Stalions on the Central Michigan sidelines, dressed as a Central Michigan coach on September 1, 2023. The NCAA Bylaws had been amended to say that coaches are responsible for their staff, even if they do not know the actions of the staff.
Is supporting Jim Harbaugh some type of blind loyalty oath? At what point can the University assess the whole situation and try and make the best move going forward? Even if the Level I violation is bogus, we have no idea exactly what the NCAA has to make it confident that it is a Level I violation, the fact is that the Level I doesn't happen, if there are not the Level II violations. Those are not in doubt, they did happen.
For fun, we can also toss in the criminal investigation of Matt Weiss. With all of those balls juggling in the air, the words, 'Lack of Institutional Control" can very easily begin to be tossed around. Do you try and fight every battle and end up losing the war or can some strategic plans be used? Suspensions doesn't mean that the University isn't still supporting Harbaugh.
January 31st, 2024 at 12:11 PM ^
How exactly is that not supporting Harbaugh?
They didn't follow through on it. They folded before Jim got his day in court.
January 31st, 2024 at 3:54 PM ^
So did Jim. He had a separate suit.
Why on earth would they “fold” at the last minute unless they got some sort of late breaking info that made the prospects look grim (which we know they got at least some of, because Partridge happened)?
They wouldn’t. The “Michigan folded at the last second, after dumping a ton of money and public reputation into defending Harbaugh, for no reason except that Warde is best buddies with Stapleton” narrative has never made sense.
January 31st, 2024 at 11:57 AM ^
You should read the letter that the UT-Knoxville chancellor sent to the NCAA
Basically, she rips them a new one. A few choice cuts:
The leaders of intercollegiate athletics owe it to student-athletes and their families to establish clear rules and to act in their best interest. Instead, two and a half years of vague and contradictory NCAA memos, emails, and "guidance" about name, image and likeness NIL) has created extraordinary chaos that student-athletes and institutions are struggling to navigate. In short, the NCAA is failing.
Earlier today, a team from the University of Tennessee met with members of your enforcement staff to discuss allegations the NCAA intends to bring against Tennessee related to NIL... The NCAA’s allegations are factually untrue and procedurally flawed.
It would have been my preference to discuss my concerns with you in person...I am sharing my perspective in writing since my December request for you to meet with me and our Athletics Director, Danny White, was denied.
Rather than partnering with institutions...the NCAA enforcement staff appears to be trying to bully institutions back to a time before the Alston decision, which will inevitably lead to more lawsuits.
It is intellectually dishonest for the NCAA staff to issue guidelines that say a third-party collective/business may meet with prospective student-athletes, discuss NIL, even enter into a contract with prospective student-athletes, but at the same time say that the collective may not engage in conversations that would be of a recruiting nature. This creates an inherently unworkable situation, and everyone knows it.
January 31st, 2024 at 1:55 PM ^
A mediocre recruiting team like Tennessee or Michigan is the problem. Meanwhile certain teams are stock piling double digit players that are number one at their position group year in and year out without any competition outside their 3 team group (OSU, Bama, Georgia). How crazy is it that?
If you win enough the NCAA doesnt fuck with you. Fall short of expectations or talk back and be ready.
FSU, Florida, Tenn, UM
Not one recruiting power house (recently) in the bunch. Curious.
NCAA: "If you are ranked 11-15th in recruiting we are coming for you!"
January 31st, 2024 at 3:56 PM ^
Michigan wrote a similarly bold letter to the B1G after the Pettiti suspension.
The version of that letter criticizing the NCAA for uh, having rules about scouting would sound a lot less good.
January 31st, 2024 at 1:22 PM ^
First, you have a very weird definition of “doing nothing”.
Second, arguing that NIL rules are an antitrust issue at least has a chance in hell of succeeding. Arguing that the NCAA does not have the authority to make rules about scouting does not.
January 31st, 2024 at 2:30 PM ^
In fairness the second time was the B1G with the NCAA pulling the strings. If the conference isn’t willing to go to bat for its institutions it is a bit deflating.
January 31st, 2024 at 3:59 PM ^
I actually don’t think the NCAA was pulling the strings on Signgate. The B1G got most of their info direct from the PIs and went ballistic on their own, the NCAA was purely in react mode and I think they would have preferred to let the whole thing blow over and be another “blah blah L2 violations” offseason story.
January 31st, 2024 at 11:06 AM ^
Glad someone is playing hardball with these clowns. Wish it was Michigan.
January 31st, 2024 at 11:23 AM ^
Hey coach, I think you would have one at least 1 national championship for us, but it wasn’t God’s Will so its ok. Are you available to be a consultant for Coach Moore?
January 31st, 2024 at 12:04 PM ^
Remember why he’s not at Kansas.
January 31st, 2024 at 12:09 PM ^
Or LSU.
Oh, who am I kidding. That behavior would've been acceptable at LSU if he had kept winning.
February 1st, 2024 at 7:31 AM ^
Was Les Miles ever better than 9-3 without Nick Saban first building the program to national championship levels?
January 31st, 2024 at 11:06 AM ^
I would say attorneys general.
January 31st, 2024 at 11:15 AM ^
One of my favorite plurals, along with Whoppers Jr.
January 31st, 2024 at 11:29 AM ^
That's correct, counselor.
January 31st, 2024 at 11:06 AM ^
So this seems to be how states react when they are not half full of vindictive butt hurt Spartans that only want to see the flagship university hurt with zero objectivity. ( not a question)
January 31st, 2024 at 11:06 AM ^
Meanwhile in AA ..Warde bends over "Thank you Sir.May I have another?"
January 31st, 2024 at 11:21 AM ^
"I JUST WANNA KNOW WHERE WARDE MANUEL IS RIGHT NOW"
January 31st, 2024 at 11:44 AM ^
Having lunch with his buddy Jim Stapleton
January 31st, 2024 at 11:08 AM ^
WOW! Maybe Michigan will step in and suspend Moore for 3 games because of what Tennessee is doing.
January 31st, 2024 at 12:54 PM ^
To paraphrase Tark...the NCAA is so mad at Tennessee that they're going to make Michigan suspend its coach!
January 31st, 2024 at 11:09 AM ^
Warde would have issued an apology and offered Petitti a 3 game suspension for Coach Moore and our new TBD OC.
January 31st, 2024 at 1:57 PM ^
Nah, he'd never do that. However, he would allow the B1G to suspend the football head coach.
Nothing personal, mind you.
January 31st, 2024 at 11:10 AM ^
Here's my non-lawyer question. The NCAA is a voluntary association and its rules are made by its members. So the schools suing the NCAA are in some ways suing themselves? Is there any world where a court would say something like, "why don't you just leave the NCAA if you don't like its rules? or Why don't you just change the rules yourself?"